Is marriage becoming the preserve of the affluent?

[ChocolateWombat]

Having been a parent at a state school in a socially mixed area, and also a parent at an affluent independent school, I have noticed a real difference in whether parents are married or not.

In the independent school of almost 600 pupils, almost all of the parents are or seem to be/have been married - on the parents list, almost every mother is Mrs...
However, at the socially mixed school, probably 2/3 of the parents were unmarried. Those who were seemed to be the more middle class ones. It just got me thinking.

Now before this turns into a state school/independent school issue, I really don't want it to. My interest is in the role affluence plays in whether people marry or not - I can totally see that in state schools in affluent areas, similar numbers of parents are likely to be married.

Is marriage becoming the preserve of the affluent and something out of the ordinary for the less affluent? Is this the case and if so, why?

Interesting that I sound like a reporter. You will find me on many threads,including a current one about people who call their partner 'hubby' when they are not actually married. It was partly what sparked my question.
I think your example of a young girl who was pregnant and who never got round to marrying and then split up is probably quite common. I suspect, but have no evidence, that the more affluent are more likely than the less affluent to be married before having children. Lots of people still get married after having children, but a decent number don't and as that IFS report that was linked to right at the thread said, there is a link between how long people have been together before having a child and if they get married. Those who have unplanned pregnancies quickly in a relationship often don't get married - it seems the relationship was never intended to become long term - some of them do, but many don't.

Definitely. You can draw graphs -very low income, single mothers better off on benefits with no live in lover even. Rich well educated woman too lazy to work finds rich man to marry and keep her. Then most of us in the middle who can afford to marry

I was the only mother in a 2 year private prep school of about 46 children in that year who was divorced. One other was widowed. Another was on a second marriage. No one was "living in sin". There is also an ethnic issue where I live as Pakistani/indian families - the majority here tend to marry. Even in the state school sector out here a lot of women are muslim, more primary aged chidlren cover their heads than not in my nearest school and sex outside of marriage is a moral wrong for them so on all fronts marriage it the thing in this area.

Although not for me - paying one massive divorce settlement to a man who earned a tenth of what I do is more than enough. In fact I don't think I'd even let a man move in now.

Bloody hell! I can not believe my eyes reading this thread!

'Battery'
you 'value yourself' too much to live with someone before marriage?? Really??
I tell my dd's to value themselves enough that they dont need to rush into marriage and to make sure they live together first. You dont know someone well unless you live together first. Try before you buy.

Unless of course you dont mind discovering his bad habits after marriage as long as there is a 4 bed detached with 2 cars in the drive.

As for feeling self councious about your ring when pregnant, words fail me tbh.

It's the traditional view. If he has all the bits he's after before he's married you why would he propose?

What bits would they be?

I'd hazard a guess that my relationship has lasted longer than all your marriages.

Despite our so called progressive and liberal society, I think that many young women today do still feel self conscious being unmarried when pregnant. We might like to think our society is so progressive that no one notices or cares anymore, but people do and its not just older people or hoes who are highly conservative.
Huge numbers are all for living together and trying out lots of partners earlier in life, but want the stability they perceive marriage giving before children - hence the large no.s who marry in late 20s and early 30s and very quickly have a child - they married primarily for that purpose, although no doubt other things came into play too.
There is a large element of wanting to conform in all this. If you find yourself the only unmarried person amongst a group of pregnant people you can feel uncomfortable - no one else might even notice or care at all, but people like to feel they fit in. Perhaps in certain communities, being unmarried with children makes you different, whereas in others the balance has tipped and has totally become the norm, so people don't even consider it very much.

Not in my world. No one cares.

Not in my world either.

As for 'Lotus' question: why would he propose?
Because he didnt want to lose me.
I am sooooo special !

Actually joke aside in my circle i see this. Men are dezperate to marry as they feel more insecure while womenlike their independence.
Maybe it is just my friends i dont know.

I also see the opposite of what OP says in my non British circle. In our cultures the poorer and more working class marry younger, the richer or those who emmigrated to uk can play the bohemian card.

I'm amused by the defensive attitude of those who have chosen not to marry. That is your right - just as it is my right to decide that I want to be married before having children. You can judge me all you like, but the fact of the matter is that I will not put myself in a situation where I could literally be thrown out without a penny, as my mother was.

It is a matter of fact that marriage conveys certain legal rights. I don't understand why others would forgo that but I respect their right to do so and wouldn't dream of attacking them for it.

I would never be in a position to be thrown out without a penny. I may be unmarried but I'm not stupid and also capable of earning my own money and supporting myself.

Maybe I'm being defensive because I've been called foolish and thick for choosing not to marry.

Me and now DH had been together for nearly 10 years when we thought about having children. it was then we decided to marry and just had a personal (just us and photographer& wedding planner) wedding. I would not have had children outside of marriage ( no moral judgement on those who do) Just not my choice - I wanted to make sure I was financially OK if things didn't work out

Crystal

I can't be thrown out of a house that's only in my name.

Hellrunner

So you would have had an abortion rather than becoming an unmarried mother?

What happens to the women (or men for that matter) who don't particularly want a career, who just want to have children and stay home to look after them? I guess those days are just over, we all have to have our own money now, family money is no more.

The same thing as always has happened fakename. If they stay happily married/unmarried for ever after they're fine. If they are married and get divorced then there's a chance their DH will have to give them some financial support for the future. If they are unmarried and their DP does a runner then they're screwed. Family money is still very much a thing if you're married, but if you're unmarried it's a dicier proposition.

On the financial security aspect of marriage now, I imagine a single woman is as likely to own their own home as a man nowadays. So when she meets someone she already has the security of home ownership so isn't going to be dependant on a man financially. For a woman in this situation marriage isn't so financially crucial.

yesthis I can scarcely imagine being adult & not wanting to contribute equally financially...

This thread seems to be in a time warp...especially women thinking others look askance at their ring finger! And the assumption that women are likely to be financially dependent & so need to marry...actually and the shaming of unmarried mothers....

Tradition is not the preserve of the affluent - actually they are more In a position to flout it - there is equally tradition in WC. There is something about worrying what others might think(!) in both milieu.... Religion may also be key.

Yet on so many threads I go on I am surrounded by hordes of women who earn pin money or no money or only work part time and their man earns the lion's share of the money. Someone like I am who earned 10x their husband by the end of an almost 20 year marriage still seems to be unusual. A lot of women seem to want to be supported by men and to stay at home or just have a part time low paid job.

A financial disadvantage of marriage is that married couples can only nominate one primary residence for capital gains tax purposes.

For me and for most of the mothers I know who gave up working it wasn't that they wanted to but rather were in a position to and felt it was what was best for their children/family. When I stopped work I was actually out earning my husband. I will go back when my son is older, or at least that's the intention. The OP posed the question why more MC women are married and I do think it largely has to do with raising children. At least that's my experience.

We are liberal as it gets without going red and religion certainly didn't play a part in it. I went to Smith College in the USA and certainly have my feminist street cred thank you very much! But I'm no fool and I never would have stopped work without being married to raise children. It's a risk I wouldn't take.

Marriage is also a chance to publicly and with the support of your community make a statement of commitment to one another. For me that's very different than just drifting from dating to living together without having a clear commitment. None if this is to say one way is better than the other. It's just some of the possible reasons why MC are more likely to be married.

I am also on the other thread and the friends of mine who chose to get married are the ones that are royally screwed and have ended up with less than they thought to nothing at all. Yes the law says the exw and children should have certain protections but in practice that is only if the exhs play ball. Or you can actually track him down.

It seems like a cultural thing to me. Most people don't decide to get married because they think that if they split up they will be able to get a decent divorce settlement and be legally protected - that might be the case, but it isn't the motivation.

Oliver, they are royally screwed because they gave up their full time career, whether married otherwise. Always a foolish act and unfair on the children. Work full time with short maternity leaves and you and your children tend to benefit. Worked very well for me/us.

Is that you , Xenia?

Ha ha!

Lotus where did I say they gave up careers. All these exws work, what they got at the end was dc an exh wasn't paying for and a large solicitors bill.